https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Jan Macku changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #36 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/setconf
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about c
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Patrik Kopkan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Jan Macku changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review+ |fedora-review?
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #35 from Jan Macku ---
Miro, I decided to package alternatives (C) to Fedora. Once it will be ready, I
will create bug and add put you to the CC.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Patrik Kopkan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #34 from Miro Hrončok ---
Good. Try to get some more please. Taking something a bit out of your comfort
zone (non Python) might teach you a lot, yet even Python reviews will do.
Some Go:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/li
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #33 from Jan Macku ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #32)
> Thanks. Now before I proceed with sponsoring, I'd like to see more reviews
> by you. Have you done any?
I currently reviewing Patrick's cursor package:
https://
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #32 from Miro Hrončok ---
Thanks. Now before I proceed with sponsoring, I'd like to see more reviews by
you. Have you done any?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #31 from Jan Macku ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #30)
> In order to get into packagers groups, you need to sign the contributor
> agreement.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Fedora_Project_Contributor_Agreement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #30 from Miro Hrončok ---
In order to get into packagers groups, you need to sign the contributor
agreement.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Fedora_Project_Contributor_Agreement
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You ar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Jan Macku changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(jama...@redhat.co |
|m)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jama...@redhat.com
Flags|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Patrik Kopkan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(pkop...@redhat.co |
|m)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Jan Macku changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(pkop...@redhat.co
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #25 from Jan Macku ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #23)
> Note that in my experience `sed -i ...` is commonly used in such scenarios
> instead of awk.
Hi,
I tryed to use sed, but it didn't worked for me in this case, so
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #24 from Patrik Kopkan ---
I noticed that there is new version of setconf out.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
__
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #23 from Miro Hrončok ---
Note that in my experience `sed -i ...` is commonly used in such scenarios
instead of awk.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about change
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #22 from Petr Viktorin ---
I assume that should be "the file is first opened for writing", not "reading".
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this p
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Patrik Kopkan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(pkop...@redhat.co |
|m)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Jan Macku changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(pkop...@redhat.co
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #19 from Jan Macku ---
Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jamacku/setconf/fedora-29-x86_64/00855916-setconf/setconf.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jamacku/setconf/fedora-29-x86
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #18 from Miro Hrončok ---
Also note:
setconf.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/setconf.py 644 /usr/bin/env python
The "script" was not executable, so the shebang had no use what so ever. A
shebang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Petr Viktorin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pvikt...@redhat.com
--- Comment #17 f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #16 from Jan Macku ---
Hi Patrik,
I tried it, but the problem is, that this test require shebang in setconf.py.
The test run setconf.py several times with diferent parameters to different
files to test functionality of the setconf.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #15 from Patrik Kopkan ---
Hi Jan,
you can't put your license even if it the same type, so keep there the license
of repo. I wanted also ask that there is some shell script that runs tests
could we use them?
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #14 from Jan Macku ---
Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jamacku/setconf/fedora-29-x86_64/00855533-setconf/setconf.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jamacku/setconf/fedora-29-x86
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #13 from Jan Macku ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #10)
> https://github.com/xyproto/setconf/archive/0.7.5/setconf-0.7.5.tar.gz
Sorry, I didn't try this url. Thank you.
I'll replace it and post here new url for spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #11 from Jan Macku ---
(In reply to Patrik Kopkan from comment #4)
> So there is need to fix warnings/errors from rpmlint.
>
> - delete from summary dot and make it shorter (shouldn't exceed 80
> characters)
Fixed
> - break desc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #12 from Jan Macku ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #7)
> One more thing:
>
> [!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
>
Test added.
>
> What the upstream status? They run tests on Travis CI.
>
> https://travis-ci
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #10 from Miro Hrončok ---
> git/rpmbuild didn't get it
get what?
$ LANG=C.utf8 wget
https://github.com/xyproto/setconf/archive/0.7.5/setconf-0.7.5.tar.gz
--2019-02-06 14:03:34--
https://github.com/xyproto/setconf/archive/0.7.5/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #9 from Jan Macku ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #3)
> Any conclusion? Also note that FedoaReview is automated (and quite broken)
> tool. You are doing the review, not the tool. You should not paste stuff
> like:
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #8 from Jan Macku ---
Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jamacku/setconf/fedora-29-x86_64/00855508-setconf/setconf.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/jamacku/setconf/fedora-29-x86_
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #7 from Miro Hrončok ---
One more thing:
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
What the upstream status? They run tests on Travis CI.
https://travis-ci.org/xyproto/setconf/jobs/428555831#L450
--
You are receiving this ma
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #5 from Patrik Kopkan ---
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #3)
> Any conclusion? Also note that FedoaReview is automated (and quite broken)
> tool. You are doing the review, not the tool. You should not paste stuff
> like:
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #4 from Patrik Kopkan ---
So there is need to fix warnings/errors from rpmlint.
- delete from summary dot and make it shorter (shouldn't exceed 80 characters)
- break description into two lines or more lines (line also shouldn't e
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
--- Comment #3 from Miro Hrončok ---
Any conclusion? Also note that FedoaReview is automated (and quite broken)
tool. You are doing the review, not the tool. You should not paste stuff like:
Cannot parse rpmlint output
But instead, you s
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Patrik Kopkan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Patrik K
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670441
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mhron...@redhat.com,
|
39 matches
Mail list logo
